EPA Rejects Alabama's Plan to Store Coal Ash in Unlined Riverfront Ponds

{TheChronicle.cc} –The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has formally rejected Alabama’s plan to allow utilities to leave millions of tons of coal ash in unlined ponds alongside rivers. The EPA's decision, announced today, stated that Alabama’s proposal was "significantly less protective of people and waterways than federal law requires."

This decision follows a lengthy billion-dollar dispute between Alabama and the EPA, which began last August when the EPA initially proposed rejecting the state's plan.

“EPA is laser-focused on protecting people from exposure to pollution, like coal ash, that can cause cancer risks and other serious health issues,” said EPA Administrator Michael Regan in a news release.

The EPA criticized Alabama's approved permits for not meeting federal standards. The primary issue was that Alabama’s plan would allow coal ash to remain in unlined ponds, in contact with groundwater, which the EPA determined to be unacceptable.

“Under federal regulations, coal ash units cannot be closed in a way that allows coal ash to continue to spread contamination in groundwater after closure,” the EPA stated. “In contrast, Alabama’s permit program does not require that groundwater contamination be adequately addressed during the closure of these coal ash units.”

Coal ash, or coal combustion residuals (CCR), contains hazardous substances such as arsenic, mercury, and heavy metals. The EPA first enacted coal ash regulations in 2015 following notable disasters, such as the TVA Kingston dam breach in Tennessee, and ongoing evidence of coal ash contaminating surface and groundwater.

Utilities and state regulators in Alabama argued that removing and relocating the coal ash to lined landfills would be extremely costly for utility customers, potentially increasing expenses by billions of dollars. They maintained that the ponds could be sufficiently closed using a cover-in-place method.

The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), responsible for the state's coal ash program and the permits now deemed insufficient by the EPA, expressed disappointment with the decision and plans to appeal in federal court.

“EPA itself has stated that the ADEM CCR rule is at least as protective as the EPA rule, the only legal criterion for CCR program approval,” ADEM stated. “However, EPA now claims that CCR program approval is conditioned on the permits issued by ADEM complying with the novel and questionable reinterpretations of numerous longstanding federal requirements that EPA would employ if EPA were to issue CCR permits. EPA has no program to issue CCR permits.”